In this day and age does proselytizing still work?

[Vinayaka]

Interesting. Where are the statistics? Please be kind enough to provide the source to read up.

Thanks in advance.

At the time I wrote the OP, I had done no research, it was a hypothetical from observation. But PEW does some research in the area. It shows generally a trend away from religion.

 

[firedragon]

At the time I wrote the OP, I had done no research, it was a hypothetical from observation. But PEW does some research in the area. It shows generally a trend away from religion.

You were quoting India. And some conversions from Christianity to Hinduism, and not because of proselytising but out of volition.

Did you make those comments without any statistics?

 

[Vinayaka]

You were quoting India. And some conversions from Christianity to Hinduism, and not because of proselytising but out of volition.

Did you make those comments without any statistics?

Oh yeah, that one. It was in a press release about a month ago. I'll try to find it.

edit ... that didn't take long ... At 47%, Hinduism biggest gainer in religious conversion in Kerala

 

[firedragon]

Oh yeah, that one. It was in a press release about a month ago. I'll try to find it.

edit ... that didn't take long ... At 47%, Hinduism biggest gainer in religious conversion in Kerala

Oh great. Thanks a lot.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Let's assume that the goal of proselytizing is to gain converts. I think it's clear, because of religious growth statistics from the past, that at one time it did work. But in 2021 do you think it still does? So the 2 choices in the debate are simple : Yes it works, or No, it doesn't, and then give your reasons. Of course the third option of 'I don't know' is always available.

I have a couple of observations. At a lot of the ex-________ discussion groups, one of the most common reasons for leaving is the pressure to proselytize, or just exposure to excessive proselytizing. So there's a statistic hidden there somewhere for net loss. Proselytizing also works in some places, I would assume. So which is greater, net loss, or net gain?

The second observation is from the state of Kerala in India, where Christian proselytizing in a heavy way has been going on for about 200 years. As a result, Kerala has one of the largest Christian groups in India. There are smaller states with higher percentages, but Kerala and it's neighbour, TN lead the way in sheer numbers.
The state government now keeps track of changes. Interestingly, in 2020, the highest number of conversions was the Christian to Hindu subsect. (for the first time in history)This wasn't due to proselytising, but due to peoples own volitions, and more or less deconversion, or going back to roots.

Thoughts? (I have more as well.)

Proselytizing is falls upon deaf ears to one who is secure in one's path, but there are those who are seekers who are still looking for a path. Those are the ones, IMO, proselytizers have the best chance catch in their snare.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Is it still successful? For JW’s, it is. Although we’re not at the moment going from door-to-door, we are continuing our ministry through other means....letter-writing, phone calls, etc. And we’re growing in number.

I hope you guys go back to going door to door soon. I miss having coffee with JWs.

 

[SalixIncendium]

No idea how this relates to the topic. You'll have to explain.

Perhaps he saw the word "proselytizing" in the title and took it as an invitation?

 

[oldbadger]

Thats not what I said ?

No, you mentioned how some Christians deny many others... 80% wasn't it?
I pointed out the rest.

 

[oldbadger]

I hope you guys go back to going door to door soon. I miss having coffee with JWs.

Snap.

 

[Windwalker]

Take, for instance, the Bible’s stance on fornication.... it seems that very few, relative to the world’s population, restrain their sexual activity, and limit it to their marriage mate. In fact, a less percentage of people now (than, say, 60 years ago) even want to get married. As in, “get the milk for free.”

There is a difference between believing in marriage as an institution, and couples having committed relationships. I've been with the same woman for the past 20 years, unmarried. But to say that is "getting the milk for free" is a completely bogus thing to say. There is nothing 'free' about it. Commitment to another, is a commitment regardless.

But the 'get the milk for free' thing, that is about sex. Couples don't live together just for sex! That's maybe what a teenager might think, that people get married to have sex, but they clearly are not adults and understand adult relationships. Teenager's center of the universe originates in their groin areas.

Besides, if we're going to make it all about sex, then the best quote I've heard anahiliates this 'milk for free' idea. "The difference between sex for money and sex for free, is that sex for free costs a lot more!". And that is the truth of it. Committed relationships are not "free milk" by any stretch of the imagination. You have to work on them.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Let's assume that the goal of proselytizing is to gain converts. I think it's clear, because of religious growth statistics from the past, that at one time it did work. But in 2021 do you think it still does? So the 2 choices in the debate are simple : Yes it works, or No, it doesn't, and then give your reasons. Of course the third option of 'I don't know' is always available.

I have a couple of observations. At a lot of the ex-________ discussion groups, one of the most common reasons for leaving is the pressure to proselytize, or just exposure to excessive proselytizing. So there's a statistic hidden there somewhere for net loss. Proselytizing also works in some places, I would assume. So which is greater, net loss, or net gain?

The second observation is from the state of Kerala in India, where Christian proselytizing in a heavy way has been going on for about 200 years. As a result, Kerala has one of the largest Christian groups in India. There are smaller states with higher percentages, but Kerala and it's neighbour, TN lead the way in sheer numbers.
The state government now keeps track of changes. Interestingly, in 2020, the highest number of conversions was the Christian to Hindu subsect. (for the first time in history)This wasn't due to proselytising, but due to peoples own volitions, and more or less deconversion, or going back to roots.

Thoughts? (I have more as well.)

My church proselytizes hard and I'd still gaining converts.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

At the time I wrote the OP, I had done no research, it was a hypothetical from observation. But PEW does some research in the area. It shows generally a trend away from religion.

That's the net result, but from what I can remember, the curve is getting more dumbbell-shaped: moderate religion is losing members both to non-religion and to more fundamentalist religion.

 

[Clara Tea]

My answer is 'no'.

One reason: With all the mass communication today and all the scandals that are in such evidence, failure to 'walk the talk' is a part of the equation. In simple terms: "why should I leave my religion with its corrupt leaders for your religion with its corrupt leaders and preachers"?

There are other reasons to which I might post as I think of them, but hypocritical preaching has to be up there.

Some believe that reading scriptures is good enough. That reminds me of the TV movie Roots, in which Kunte Kinte was being whipped until he changed his name to Toby (which he refused to do), and he was requesting a discussion with the plantation manager who, at the time, was too busy studying the bible to talk. When bible study interferes with bible practice, there is a problem.

Aside from that fictional account, we should also consider the real issue of today....war in Iraq. God said "thou shalt not kill" and "thou shalt not bear false witness," and Revelation said that God would seek vengeance if anyone attacked Iraq (such as Revelation 15 (7 plagues, and I presume that COVID was one of them). We know that we're not to attack Iraq, yet, we defy God, assume that mankind knows more than God (who can see the future), and sin by making war.

It is more important to put God's words into practice than study the theoretical meaning of them.

 

[Marcion]

I'm happy that prosetylizers are allowed to exist in the freer part of the world. There are many countries with billions of people where you are not free to accept never mind allowed to spread another ideology than the one the state prefers you to follow. Think of China, North Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia or even India.

 

[Vinayaka]

My church proselytizes hard and I'd still gaining converts.

Yes, although that has slowed in recent years. World population growth rate exceeds your growth rate, so in that sense, it's declining. I'm not familiar with how the demographics are kept in LDS. Do you know?

For example, the JWs take people off their roles after 6 months of inactivity, so they're self-assessment of numbers is lower than independent researchers. The Baha'i, in stark contrast, keep all of their numbers of anyone who ever showed up. So they still count all the inactives. I'm not sure of Mormon plicy on it, but I do know from reading the ex-Mormon forum that many people are quite frustrated at how difficult it is to get off the official roles, if they indeed did choose to do that.

So keeping these kinds of statistics accurate is a challenge at best for all involved.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Let's assume that the goal of proselytizing is to gain converts.

Maybe somewhat cynically, I see a lot of goals of proselytizing besides gaining converts.

For one thing, proselytizing can work as a filter. Say you want to fleece a bunch of people, but you also don't want to put a lot of effort into people who won't yield the returns you're after. If you require members to do a pointless, demanding task (e.g. going door-to-door to "win converts"), then you weed out the people who wouldn't be good marks. That lets you concentrate your efforts on the people who have shown that they can be manipulated.

And speaking of manipulation, it can be easier to manipulate a group of people if you separate them from larger society. If the group you control becomes their world, then you can control what they see and hear, and leaving becomes harder. Sending people out into the world to be rejected and alienated over and over and over strikes me as a very effective way to create that separation. And as a bonus, it wouldn't come across as you the leader denying them freedoms; it would be something that they'd do on their own.

I think it's important to recognize that a proselytizer being continually rejected by the world while also being continually accepted by their church works very well as raw material for many - if not most - of the warning signs of a dangerous group or leader.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Yes, although that has slowed in recent years. World population growth rate exceeds your growth rate, so in that sense, it's declining. I'm not familiar with how the demographics are kept in LDS. Do you know?

For example, the JWs take people off their roles after 6 months of inactivity, so they're self-assessment of numbers is lower than independent researchers. The Baha'i, in stark contrast, keep all of their numbers of anyone who ever showed up. So they still count all the inactives. I'm not sure of Mormon plicy on it, but I do know from reading the ex-Mormon forum that many people are quite frustrated at how difficult it is to get off the official roles, if they indeed did choose to do that.

So keeping these kinds of statistics accurate is a challenge at best for all involved.

It is hard to get off the rolls.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Do you see the JWs as a religion that engages in proselytising?

Of course! But without coercion.
We may try to overcome initial objections...they might be misinformed. For example, many people tell us they don’t want to talk because we “don’t believe in Jesus.” And nothing could be further from the truth! (There might be other misinformation they’ve been taught about us.)
But if the person still isn’t interested, we’ll leave.

Do you feel proselytising has assisted the growth of the JWs?

Oh, yes! Without a doubt. That’s how I was found.

Thanks in advance for answering my questions.

You’re welcome. I appreciate your amiability. It’s your nature, isn’t it?

 

[Vinayaka]

It is hard to get off the rolls.

So what do you figure (and I'm sure it varies by country) is the percentage of Mormons who are inactive but still counted? In many modern churches it's on a continuum, where there are the incredibly active down to the once a year, or only weddings and funerals crowd. It strikes me that in Mormonism most are all in.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

For example, the JWs take people off their roles after 6 months of inactivity, so they're self-assessment of numbers is lower than independent researchers.

That’s an indication of honesty, isn’t it?

Thanks for that data, I wasn’t aware of that.